As you have done a lot of editing to VNSA now renamed to Violent non-state actor, you might like to see if you can cite sources from some of the paragraph next to which I have placed a {{Fact}} template. --PBS (talk) 11:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

The article fails WP:CSD#A7, as it does not assert the notability of the subject. Why exactly do we care about this particular documentary? What makes it unique? Can its notability be established by reliable sources? These are all questions that popped up in my head after reading your brief article. In addition, there appears to be a clear conflict of interest in your editing, as you appear to be connected to the organization behind the documentary. Nishkid64(Make articles, not wikidrama) 00:54, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

If you could address my concerns and show me reliable sources that demonstrate the subject's notability, I'd be glad to restore the article. Nishkid64(Make articles, not wikidrama) 00:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

In its present state, the article failed to make an assertion of notability. It simply stated that it was a documentary focusing on Prodesis. I've found only five unique case-sensitive hits for this documentary, which leads me to believe that in any case, notability cannot be established according to Wikipedia policy. Nishkid64(Make articles, not wikidrama) 03:06, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Howdy. I have removed a number of links from articles you have worked on to your wikipedia user page. If you/your organisation/group/team is notable enough to warrant your own page in the main encyclopaedia, that would be appropriate to link to, but userpages aren't. - TB (talk) 09:56, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Sleaze Rock re-directs because of a previous AfD vote by Wikipedia editors because it was determined to be a false genre that didn't really exist. Even your own original research in your attempts to undo the re-direct do not disprove this original consensus. A re-direct cannot be undone without going through the proper Wikipedia channels. Editors who continually try and re-establish pages that have been deemed re-direct by consensus can be blocked from editing if they do not use the proper channels for re-creates. The Real Libs-speak politely 21:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I take it that your disambig page was unsourced. Regardless of how good a page looks or sounds, if the information contained is not verifiable, out it goes. I notice you mention that the definition of Sleaze Rock is different where you live. It's possible that this is a colloquial misunderstanding of the term 'Sleaze Rock', and as such is not notable enough to warrant a blocking redirect to serve a single community. Every page I've seen so far refers to sleaze rock as various types of hair metal or glam rock. Find a reliable source that says otherwise, talk it out on the talk page, and THEN, if you have support, change it. It's not easy to overturn an AFD consensus, however. --King ♣Talk 14:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 00:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mirror, the problem with the way it is written is that the sentences don't seem to mean much — the English is odd. I wonder whether the original source is not a native English speaker, or whether something has been lost in translation. I would copy edit it if I could, but I honestly don't understand it. For example,

"One can adhere to a meaning of intrinsic value of animals in a sense that is ... behaviouristic, as a morally neutral value (like in parameter) that the animal's own species-specific behaviour seeks to satisfy ..."

Animals want to exercise their species specific behaviour. If they can't they develop stress and in the long run trauma's. So they have an interest, they are stakeholders. If the term intrinsic value refers (according to someone) to the animal's urge of exercising its species specific behaviour, then that urge is a value. The animal 'measures' the difference between the actual situation, and the desired situation, and seeks to minimize this discrepancy (satify its needs). That is a behaviouristic, a morally neutral meaning of the term. It doesn't presuppose a moral actor, just the animal by itself...

Okay, I accept that the urge has (or is) a value. Apart from that, I am lost. What is the source for this? SlimVirgintalk|contribs 01:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

That book is a collection of papers, I believe. Which papers are you taking the material from exactly, and what are the page numbers? SlimVirgintalk|contribs 01:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm wondering whether English isn't your first language, or whether the way the book is written is unclear. Can you tell me what it says exactly that was the basis of -- "One can adhere to a meaning of intrinsic value of animals in a sense that is ... behaviouristic, as a morally neutral value (like in parameter) that the animal's own species-specific behaviour seeks to satisfy ..."? And the exact page number. If I have a page number, I can perhaps look it up. Also, I see you've moved the material elsewhere. Really, it needs to be clarified before being added anywhere else. SlimVirgintalk|contribs 02:26, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Another interpretation of intrinsic value however, rather views the animal from a scientific (biological and/or ethological) perspective. In this conception, certain (non-moral) standards can be formulated concerning the animal's bodily functions and its interaction with the environment. Suffering can be defined as a discrepancy between the animal's actual condition and these standards. The animal's natural behaviour basically aims at minimalizing this discrepancy. The greater the discrepancy, and the longer the animal remains incapable of reducing it, the more it suffers. Baerends (1973) calls these standards expectancy-values. In this sense intrinsic value is a descriptive, rather than an moral term, and as such has no ethical dimension to it. It refers to preferences and needs of animals which, if satisfied, contribute to the animal's welfare, and if frustrated, leave the animal suffering. The animal's mental state constitutes a balance between satisfaction and frustration. There is nothing beyond interests, needs, satisfaction and frustration. (page 35)

Thank you for posting that. I can't see how the author can use "intrinsic value" in this way. I think perhaps the problem here is that this is quite a difficult philosophical concept, and there's a language problem in getting it into WP (I'm assuming now that English isn't your first language, as this material is Dutch). In addition, you're not familiar with Wikipedia's content policies. So we have translation problems at quite a few levels! :)

I'd be happy to help, but I'm having difficulty understanding what's being said. You can do one of two things: (a) write an article about the specific book you're taking this material from. That will allow you to be very detailed about what the author is saying, though you will have to make clear that this is the opinion of just one author; or (b) write an article about the concept of intrinsic value (animals) in general, in which case you will have to use multiple sources, give the history of the concept, say how it is used, argue for and against.

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Intrinsic value (animal ethics), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Animal ethics. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally moving or duplicating content, please be sure you have followed the procedure at Wikipedia:Splitting by acknowledging the duplication of material in edit summary to preserve attribution history.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 02:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Just so you're aware, PRODs ARE a call to improve an article. Once an article is prodded, it's up to you to prove how the article meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, specifically WP:NOTE and WP:V. Keep in mind that an IMBD page doesn't establish notability. Find a newspaper article or something. --KingÖomie 13:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I removed some of the prods on the movies and found some reason why they might be notable. Note that this doesn't necessarily mean they will be kept; someone can put them to articles for deletion, where they will at least demand more sources. (I didn't look for sources, I just went by what articles linked to them.) I suggest you read WP:MOVIE, the policy on film notability, and make sure that when you write articles you make some claim that meets something there. You might want to look at what articles refer to your article for ideas; try searching for the topic and make sure that links line up. (I found links for two of them that way). I really appreciate you doing the work to get these articles added, if they are notable, but we have to make sure that they meet the criteria for inclusion. Good luck! Rigadoun(talk) 21:28, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Darrenhusted (talk) 22:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Mary Jane West-Eberhard.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 22:17, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alasdair MacIntyre, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foucault (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Your upload of File:Aral Sea Basin.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:11, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Another one of your uploads, File:Chiapas-Maya.gif, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:23, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Babylon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Profane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Chiapas conflict, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cañada (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. G S Palmer(talk • contribs) 23:59, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Tzixcao1.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Thank you for uploading File:Mexico+Chiapas+Prodesis.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Thank you for uploading File:Aral Sea Basin.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Hi, for the above two maps - Can you please add a source for the underlying map - it might not be free to use. Deadstar (talk) 09:52, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Please see this. I also noticed that you frequently edit "See also" sections. Please review WP:ALSO: "the "See also" section should not repeat links that appear in the article's body or its navigation boxes." --Omnipaedista (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2014 (UTC)